Re: The Politics of National Security
Posted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 10:43 pm
a fan wrote: ↑Mon Dec 02, 2019 9:33 pmNot ignoring what Bush did. I'm saying it's all fruit from the same line of thinking. Until our thinking changes, all that's different is where our troops are located, which part of the ME are our troops in, and in how great of numbers.old salt wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 9:42 pmThings had stabilized by 2009.
Bush is responsible for what we did 2000 - 2008, Obama for 2009 - 2016. Trump for 2017 - present.
They inherited what their predecessor left them. They're responsible for what happened on their watch.
By saying it's all the same, you blithely ignore all the Bush got us into, & then what he did to fix things by the time he left office.
What you're doing here is pointing at 1988 and saying, "see, we're pretty stable". I'm saying nope, this is just a relatively calm period. It will go to *hit, because it always does. And because we have troops everywhere, we thoughtlessly commit troops to new dangers (Syria, Saudi Arabia) with no more thought than it takes to breath in and out.
If it does while Trump's in office, he'll bomb the attacking country to rubble, but he won't invade or occupy.
He's resisted pressure from the (D)'s & (R) Hawks to do just that in Syria. Look at the grief he took for pulling 28 Green Berets on tethered goat trip wire posts in Syria. You went nuts when he sent forces to Saudi Arabia recently, ignoring the fact they're defensive forces to deter & defend against potential Iranian missile attacks on our air & naval forces already in the Gulf States to bomb ISIS & the Taliban, while keeping the straits open.
While you're blaming Obama for anything you can think of, I hear he's also responsible for the poor script of the new Star Wars Trilogy. Is that true?old salt wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 9:42 pmThings had stabilized by 2009.
You ignore all that Obama did to make things worse. He enabled -- the Arab Spring, the ouster of Mubarek, Syrian civil war, bombing then ignoring Libya, trying to cover up Benghazi, & most of all -- allowing the rise of ISIS, then doing too little, too late to counter it. While financing the IRGC & their proxies in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq & Yemen, by ramming through JCPOA without enduring bipartisan support, knowing it would collapse with a (R) President.
Benghazi? Yep. Lying about Benghazi? Yep. Bombing Libya? Yep. Responsible for both. The rest of your made up nonsense? Nope.
Financing the IRGC? Nope. That was you, and the rest of the geniuses who thought that we HAD to remove Saddam, without one thought about what that would do to the balance of power in the region. I thought we were talking about Trump & Obama. Neither started the Iraq-Iran war.Look in the mirror for that brilliant move. "Oh no, a murderous tyrant in the Middle East that America bankrolled!!! Well, we can't have that, can we".Not if they close the choke point straits to the Persian Gulf & Red Sea (access to from Med via Suez).Now blame Trump for backing the Shah or Desert One in '79.
If you told aliens about the "strategy" to first install the Shah, then bankroll Saddam to buffer the ensuing revolutionaries in Iran, then remove Saddam as said buffer via force, and then feign surprise when....shocker....Iran is left the only large power in the region? They'd immediately conclude that dogs are running things on earth, as we are their pets.... because no one is that stupid. Yeah. That's all Trump's fault. He agrees with much of your irrational rant but doesn't have a wayback machine to the '50's for a hindsight wisdom do over.
First of all, I already have over the last 3 years.
Second of all, I don't have to. You do. You're the one telling us that your reading of foreign policy is partisan free.
So let's hear it. 20 mistakes Trump has made. Should be the easiest request you've ever fulfilled here.
They're all rhetorical. Undiplomatic style points. I already told you -- the 2 premature Syrian pullout announcements, which he walked back. The Greenland purchase gaffe (although a good idea) & insulting our staunch Danish NATO allies (which you give me no credit for criticizing at the time).
We're not at war? Dude. Do I REALLY need to give you a casualty list?
Do you think I'm angry about our ME policies for kicks? Or do you think I'm mad because US soldiers keep getting shipped home beat up in one way or another?
Factor out the non-combat ones & compare them to totals from all theaters. Analysis will show that it's a risky profession & we take casualties in non combat ops & training.
Yep. That's where it always starts. Then mission creep. Then you start in with the "we can't leave" nonsense. Rinse. Repeat.
It depends on what you mean by "large scale ground combat", but yes, I can see the difference. But out of the last 30 years, how many months were spent at "large scale ground combat". Two? Three? We were either invading, occupying, or surging in Iraq & Afghanistan with large formations, until starting drawdowns in Iraq (2008) & Afghanistan (2012).
https://www.straitstimes.com/world/unit ... fghanistan
http://www.derechos.org/nizkor/iraq/doc/costwar1.jpgTrump just announced drawdown to 8,500 in Afghanistan. 500 - 800 now in Syria. 28,000 in S Korea, ready to fight tonight.https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ho ... e-n1079531
The Defense Department told NBC News Now that there were about 13,000 troops in Afghanistan, 5,200 troops in Iraq and 3,000 in Saudi Arabia. It didn't give an answer for the estimate in Syria.
Desert Storm lasted a month. Invasion of Iraq lasted a month. After that? It was either leaving Iraq, or "nation building/making a country stable".
I can't believe you don't understand the nature of our ops now, compared to our invasions & occupations of Iraq & Afghanistan. I'm done trying to explain them to someone with a closed mind. So consider this our final discussion on this topic.
I have no clue what you think the Afghanistan War was/is----large scale ground combat? Small scale skirmishes? You tell me.
Training & enabling Afghan Security Forces & isolated, low risk Special Forces snatch & grab (& kill) raids, at time & place of our choosing, with overwhelming intel & backup -- just like we've been doing in Iraq & Syria since ISIS emerged. It's our new way of war.
If you can't see that Bergdahl was section 8.....I don't know what to tell you. Sane men don't walk through Afghanistan unarmed, with American clothes on. He stood to post. I could give a *hit if it was for only a day. He still did it. I'm glad we got him home.Obama dragged his parents before the cameras in the Rose Garden & Susan Rice went on tv telling us a deserter was a war hero. We lost 6 or 7 soldiers trying to find him. Bring him home, but don't tuen him into a hero, then take credit for saving him.old salt wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 9:42 pmTriumphs ? The rise of the Caliphate ? All his "triumphs" were temporary, designed to fall apart after he left office, because he committed to crank ideas that were not supported & could not be sustained. ...or are you referring to the Rose Garden celebration of war hero Berghdahl.
You know full well Obama had foreign policy victories, just as every other President, including our current President. Just stop with this silliness.
He OK'd the raid to take out OBL. Good call.